About your Search

20130512
20130520
STATION
MSNBCW 5
KNTV (NBC) 3
CNNW 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
CSPAN2 1
FBC 1
KRON (MyNetworkTV) 1
LANGUAGE
English 18
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)
of their political department. according to the russians, he works for the cia. they say they caught him red handed in an unconvincing blond wig in the process of trying to recruit some of their own or one of their own, russian special services agents. they say they caught him with what essentially amounts to a spy kit, which included a compass, a flashlight, a couple of pocket knives and they also say a big bundle of cash, sunglasses, another wig, and a written letter which they say were instructions for the man that he is trying or accused of trying to recruit there. he's been released back to u.s. embassy officials. and the russian foreign min sfree now says that he's persona non grata, he's been being exspelled from the country. >> it's not surprise that the russia has spies and the u.s. has spies and they're out there spying on each other. this comes at an awkward time in the relationship between the two countries which was frothy and then is thawing out a little. >> it has been frosty over the last 18 months since vladimir putin returned to the presidency of this country and the russian gover
services say they detained a u.s. diplomat they claim is a cia agent after they caught him red handed trying to recruit a russian agent. the fasb said in a statement tuesday that grant focal a third secretary of the u.s. embassy in moscow, was carrying special technical equipment, disguises, written instructions and a large sum of money when he was detained overnight. state television showed pictures of a man said to be focal sitting at a desk and as the offices. the fsb said fogel was handed over to u.s. embassy officials. no immediate comment was available from the u.s. embassy. >> america's cup officials are meeting today in san francisco the discuss how the race to move forward following the death of a sailor during a practice run. jackie sissel is live this morning along the embarcadero. >> basically what has prompted the four remaining teams to meet with race officials to discuss the future of their race and safety concerns. last week, the racing boat from the artemis racing capsized in the water on the bay trapping one of the crew members, andersen's and, underneath the boat. h
. he said basically the revisions to the e-mails are what we described as a manipulation of the cia to get the truth that you want. he referred to it saying it was clear from the get-go that terrorist activity was involved in the attacks in benghazi, those that left four americans, including the u.s. ambassador there dead. today we heard from mccain as well as senator kellie ayotte, saying they want further testimony from hillary clinton, then secretary of state. here was representative issa earlier today, explaining the priorities to his committee. >> was the response correct? could it have been better? why weren't things at least tried or revved up to be tried. afterwards, how could you change talking points 12 times from what seems to be relatively right to what seems to be completely wrong? >> what i hear being assessed is all kinds of ulterior motives. i don't believe they existed. i don't think you can question that there was ma levelens on the part of the president, on the part of the secretary of state or anyone else. it was a very unfortunate incident that turned in to be,
on the hamid karzai claiming cash payments from the cia and that these cash payments are continuing, and he's been confirming this and claiming it in afghanistan, and senator corker was hoping for an explanation from the president. and he said it's now been two letters, and he hasn't gotten an explanation. >> i'm not aware of the letters. i'll have to take the question. the specific story itself involves the cia, and i'd have to refer you to them. >> still -- >> with with regard to the letters, i'll let you know if there's a response. >> jay? >> yeah. >> jay, you've used this formulation about the president's support for unfettered investigative reporting a number of times here. to what extent is he, is the former constitutional law professor in the oval office torn between that philosophy and the case for, you know, going after leaks? >> i think the appropriate way to describe it is that the president believes there needs to be a balance. because there is an interest in making sure that classified information that isceps -- that is sensitive is not leaked because of the consequences to nat
investigation was to determine who leaked details about a cia operation in yemen which foiled a terrorist plot. and while people like rnc chairman reince priebus suddenly emerge from hiding to call for the attorney general's head on a platter, holder, himself, said today he recused himself from the decision to seek those media records to avoid any conflict of interest. but that he did support the investigation into a dangerous leak. >> it is the top two or three most serious leaks that i've ever seen. it put the american people at risk, and that is not hyperbole. it put the american people at risk. and trying to determine who's responsible for that, i think, required very aggressive action. >> and as mr. holder prepares to be grilled by the house judiciary committee wednesday, it's worth noting this whole investigation was called for by members of congress such as senator john mccain. >> i call on the president to take immediate and decisive action, including the appointment of a special council, to aggressively investigate the leak of any classified information on which the recent stories wer
, critics say it came up short. this new push stems from revelations that the cia's original talking points used by ambassador susan rice in the days after the attack had undergone significant edits by senior administration officials. >> for the president's spokesman to say well there were only words or technical changes made in the e-mail is a flat-out untruth when we know any reference to act of terror or al qaeda were removed from those talking points and it was done at a deputy's meeting just before susan rice went -- >> would you call this a cover-up? >> i'd call it a cover-up. i would call it a cover-up in the extent that there was wi willful removal of information which was obvious. >> he said untruths by the way. he did not use the word lie. >>> former defense secretary robert gates defending the administration's handling of the attacks in libya. >> based on everything i've read people really didn't know what was going on in benghazi contemporaneously, and to send some small number of special forces or other troops in without knowing what the environment was or threat was without ha
times as he down played what the c.i.a. was putting in the report, what they actually came out with, who was to blame for the conclusions that proved to be faulty. >>steve: any time there is a question asked of jay carney and it is something prepared for, if you notice, he reads a card off the top of his lectern. he's got things he's supposed to say. he is just the mouthpiece for this administration. it is the job of the white house press corps to ask the really tough questions. it is interesting because people are starting to wake up in the mainstream media -- thank goodness. maureen dowd yesterday wrote the administration's behavior before and during the attack in benghazi in which four americans died was unworthy of the greatest power on earth. there were other people in the mainstream media going we kind of trusted these guys. maybe we shouldn't have. >>brian: pickering is pushing back hard. former secretary of defense gates yesterday came forward. he said if i was secretary of defense, i wouldn't have sent an f-16 over there because i was afraid shoulder fire missiles might take the
of his disguise allegedly trying to recruit a russian for the cia. 29-year-old ryan fogle, a junior level diplomat caught with sunglasses, maps, money, offering up to $1 million a year, instructions for opening a gmail account. russians released him to the u.s. embassy. he'll probably be sent home. at washington's spy museum a former cia spy says it happens all the time. >> i've used disguise. sometimes something as simple as a wig and glasses will do that. even though it may look sort of corny, or sixth grade to people, it can work. >> reporter: russians call it provocative. u.s. officials don't believe it will set back communications, the boston bombing and standoff in syria. secretary of state meeting with russian counterpart in sweden, presumably not trading spy story. for "today," andrea mitchell, nbc news, washington. >>> the widow of the boston bombing suspect tamerlan tsarnaev will cooperate with investigators according to new attorney that has defended several suspects before. russell has not been charged but the legal team has yet to release details of what she saw in the days l
there was no there-there. on friday we learned the cia talking points went through 12 rounds of changes with the heavier than usual previously thought involvement of the state doe apartment and the white house. that it was outlined in a series of e-mails. here's what the president had to say about it all today. >> the whole issue of this, of talking points, frankly throughout this process has been a sideshow. the e-mails that you allude to were provided by us to congressional committees. suddenly three days ago, this gets spun up as if there's something new to the story. there's no there-there. and the fact that this keeps on getting churned out, frankly, has a lot to do with political motivations. we've had folks who have challenged hillary clinton's integrity, susan rice's integrity, mike mullen and tom pickering's integrity. it's a given that mine gets challenged by these same folks. they've used it for fund-raising. >> was the president right? is the issue of how the talking points were changed a political sideshow? u.s. congressman michael turner is on the oversight and government
used by u.n. ambassador susan rice that ultimately removed any reference to al qaeda or previous cia warnings in the region. a senior intelligence official telling nbc news deputy cia director mike morell crossed out those references on this early draft. but morell's then boss david petraeus seemed to disagree with the watered down version that excluded any mention of security warnings. writing, frankly, i'd just as soon not use this. republicans accused the white house of playing politics right before the election. >> you don't have to be sherlock holmes to figure this out. the story of benghazi if accurately reported would undercut the narrative, al qaeda's on the run and they manipulated the evidence to help the political reelection. >> the white house says no political advisers were involved in the process. and following the justice department's widely criticized seizure of journalist phone records, the white house wednesday pressed congress to revive a law that would protect reporters from having to reveal information in the future. the white house is also going to face head-on
of benghazi. that's a non-scandal. basically it was a turf war between the c.i.a. and the state department and the see jay began to walk back some of their allegations. i still there's a benghazi issue on why we didn't send support troops when ambassador stevens and others were in trouble. that issue when no action was taken that could have averted some catastrophe. i think that part remains an issue. >> i think that's a legitimate area of inquiry. but i think the real problem, judy, that faces -- judy, the federal government -- if you're going to make a case for it, it abolished slavery, it ended segregation, it built the land grant colleges that have produced more nobel prize winners than all the universities of europe combined. it saved the great lakes. it took 99% of the lead out of the air. it took wanton terror out of old age through social security. there's a case to be made for government and when government -- confidence in government and its integrity and competence is undermined, i think it's up to the president to rise to its defense and to say anybody who does this and threate
. the leak harmed a cia operation. it wanted to find out where the leak came from. they got those phone records. is that legal? how much freedom are we able to give up for so-called security? judge andrew napolitano is here. a slippery slope. did the justice department get a warrant from a judge to go get those records? >> well, we do not know, but we assumed by statements made that they use the patriot act authority which allows authorities to write their own search warrants as british soldiers were able to do prior to the american revolution -- stuart: yes, yes, yes. >> it directly contradicts the fourth amendment. they do not go to a judge, they do not present evidence of probable cause. agent a authorized agent be to do it. they show up within agent written search warrant. they serve it on the telephone company and the telephone company says, here are all the bills, telephone calls made and telephone calls received. stuart: could you make the case? it reaches the constitutional principle. >> yes. stuart: could you make a pragmatic case that the government needed this? they could det
is run." this as e-mails became public showing the administration changed cia talking points on terrorist involvement in the libya attack just before the presidential election. >> the whole issue of this -- of talking points, frankly, throughout this process has been a side show. suddenly, three days ago, this gets spun up as if there is something new to the story. there's no there there. >> reporter: but republicans see opportunity and they're accusing the president of hiding the truth. >> where is the outrage all along as things like this keep happening? the patterns becoming one in which this administration is not transparent and they don't seem to care if the right things are done. >> now, the chairman of the house judiciary committee, at least on the story involving the seizure of phone records of associated press reporters and editors says that congress will fully investigate the situation. to that end, christine, there was already a previously scheduled hearing on wednesday before that committee that attorney general eric holder is set to testify at. he is going to be asked very to
of a highly classified effort to foil a terror plot. >> officials tell us cia thwarted an al qaeda plot in yemen to detonate a bomb of a powerful explosive. >> reporter: at the time, fbi director robert mueller strongly condemned the leak. a leak like this is explosive. >> reporter: according to "a.p.," among the lines tracked were office and personal numbers of "a.p." reporters and editors, including their home and cell phone numbers. and main numbers used by the u.s. house of representatives. there was no actual listening in on calls, the ap says. ap gary pruitt says it's amounting to serious interference. advocates for journalistic freedom agree. >> the fact it was so broad, so many phone lines over a two month period and they made no attempt to negotiate to get any kind of information beforehand is outrageous. >> reporter: a former cia spokesman said leak investigations are demanding but he's surprised by the scope of this one. >> it tells me this is a very significant case in the government's eyes and willing to take the heat they will take from the news media in order to track dow
that perhaps benghazi talking points or e-mails back and forth between the state department or cia are not as compelling or understandable for most americans. but in this case it's difficult for the white house, particularly when they're having to comply with all kinds of investigations and everything else that's going to happen with congress, we're just seeing the beginning of these hearings and it's a big deal. i will point out the "new york times" has a great piece today looking at there were actually some liberal groups lumped in among these 400 groups, the vast majority of them were conservative. but there are about two dozen liberal organizations that got extra scrutiny. >> i wanted to ask you with our next topic, as a journalist your perspective on the controversy around the associated press, here's what came out on politico: "conflicting information is emerging over the process the justice department used to approve the subpoenas for associated press telephone record." >> it's difficult for me to take a view here. i'm a journalist, i've had many sources i protect and i wou
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)